Strickland says gun rights, limits can co-exist

A former Ohio governor whose career was built with help from the National Rifle Association says it's time to bring gun rights advocates, the entertainment industry and politicians together to reduce violence after the massacre of 26 people at a Connecticut school last week.
Associated Press
Dec 17, 2012


Democrat Ted Strickland spoke Monday after participating in the Ohio Electoral College that delivered Ohio's 18 electoral votes for President Barack Obama.

Strickland said the Second Amendment assuring the right to bear arms should be subject to reasonable limits, as is the case with the First Amendment guaranteeing free speech. He said restrictions could be worked out through frank dialogue for the good of the country.

A native of Appalachian eastern Ohio, Strickland said he's weighing a run against Republican Gov. John Kasich in 2014.




violence all around us. it is not just the guns. turn on tv and you can watch unlimited number of shows regarding violence, ncis, law & order, csi just to name a few. dozens of movies made every year that promote it. games for computer systems abound. right, wrong or indifferent these all put ideas into peoples heads. the media is not to go unnoticed. the media has desensitized us to violent acts. the leading story of almost every news program, no matter the hour, is about some kind of random violent act. just look at the majority of the headlines in the SR. all about violence! why not good deeds? because it just doesn't sell in most media outlets.

the world is becoming more and more evil each and every day.


So if we should have limits on Constitutional Rights we should also have limits on how many Kitchen Knives people can have. Just this week alone 5 people murdered with a knife you get from your kitchen. People are bludgeoned to death by a baseball bat and ran over with cars. It is not the Gun, the Knife or the Car that is the problem it is the insane People behind these items. Quit stripping Americans of their Constitutional Rights and get rid of the Criminals this will eliminate our problem.


Do you think that you could run through a school with a knife, baseball bat, or a car and kill 26 people ?

If they just stood there, yeah, but that's in fantasy land.

Second Opinion

wow, you liberals make it too easy.


82,000 crimes were stopped by law abiding GUN CARRIERS
270 were shot by legal gun carriers during a crime
ONLY 400 were by police!
So, it seems we get more protection from CCW permit holders than police!

""" Every place in the world that we have crime data, both before and after a gun ban has gone into effect, every single place has seen an increase in murders after the ban has been put in place. And many times it's been a several-fold or more increase. """.......... Professor John R. Lott, interviewed on CNN after the Newtown massacre.


You neocons are sloppy in your perception of reality and quick in arrogance.
The China story is news to me.
You missed the point I made-- NO ONE got KILLED.

"The huge difference between this case and the U.S. is not the suspect, nor the situation, but the simple fact he did not have an effective weapon," ...said Dr. Ding Xueliang, a Harvard-educated sociologist at the University of Science and Technology in Hong Kong.

"The huge difference ... he did not have an effective weapon,"

"In the United States, we had 9,000 people killed with guns last year, in similar countries like Germany 170 (killed with guns), in Canada 150. There's a reason for that," Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, told CNN's Piers Morgan.
"The proof in the pudding is that in every other industrialized nation except the United States, they have reasonable gun control laws, and they have hundreds of people killed each year -- not 9,000 or 10,000 a year -- killed by guns."

"... they have reasonable gun control laws..."

People are still going to get killed by guns because the world is filled with idiots, but in WAY SMALLER numbers with reasonable controls.

@Second Opinion


Switzerland has mandatory conscription, trains, and issues assault rifles to all able-bodied men between the ages of 20 and 50 (55 for officers). It has one of the highest gun ratios per capita. It also has one of the lowest crime rates in the world. Please enlighten me how "reasonable gun control laws" will help lower crime...

The second amendment is about ensuring that the governed will always have access to the same weapons as the government. Look at the 1989 protests in Tiananmen Square for an example of what a government can do when its people are not adequately armed. If you don't think our government would do that, take a very critical look at Kent State, Ruby Ridge, Elian Gonzalez, The "Fast and Furious" program, the "Patriot" Act, etc.

The more important topic is: Why isn't mainstream news looking at mental health? All of the recent shootings were committed by people on medication for mental health issues. We have anti-depressants with side-effect warnings that they may increase thoughts of suicide. We don't have gun manufacturers' commercials on TV, but sit down and watch the news some night and count how many pharmaceutical ads there are. It's bad press to upset your advertisers...


ERNesbitt...Let this article enlighten you. There are differences between Switzerland and the USA,and there is "reasonable gun control" in Switzerland (if you can figure it out from the article).

(If you've noticed, I've never said I wanted to ban guns)


The strictest gun laws can be found in #7 Brazil USA #12

Second Opinion

they could have EASILY been killed except the person was so deranged he decided to cut off fingers etc instead.

And don't forget that AFTER Britian outlawed guns the crime rate with them escalated. AND the crimes with knives are so rampant they actually have telethons to raise awareness of the extreme problems.

Even universities who have studied this has stated that in EVERY NATION that activated gun controls the crime rate increased with many increasing 3 times. Strange that you liberals can distort the facts. Silvester Stallone stated that there should be a door to door search and take guns while he himself carries! Oprah Winfrey wants gun control but has a body guard that carries, Obama's guards have fully automatic assault weapons but we can't protect ourselves with guns? We don't need any more gun control laws, if these teachers were packing this jerk would have been stopped, instead the school had to wait for the cops.

@ ERNesbit, great post, but don't think for a moment the MOONBATS will comprehend it or even try to admit the facts in it.


Second Opinion...I was misled to think that your opinions had much value.


"In the United States, we had 9,000 people killed with guns last year," - Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York

Start disarming the gangs.


Alas, the liberal mind at work with misleading stats to fit their agenda. Population USA 315 million,Germany 81 million, Canada 35 million. Roughly 4 thousand Americans killed yearly by illegals. Gang and drug gun deaths in amount? 17 thousand suicides yearly in USA, how many gun related?? In the meantime according to the Guttmacher Insitute there are 1.21 million abortions yearly in the USA!!! Sad so very sad how the liberal mind works

looking around

You want to see some nutcases just watch Sons Of Guns Red Jacket or American Guns! Yeah we need these kinds of weapons.......sure


So arms expert looking, how many people can actually attain the required license to attain the automatic weapons, featured on your mentioned shows!!

Did you know the perpetrator of the connecticut shooting was denied a permit for a rifle???


Actually obtaining the tax stamp (yeah thats what they call it) to own a class 3 weapon is not much more difficult than getting a CCW permit. Fingerprints, background check, sheriff signing off, Feds issuing permit, then getting your class 3 weapon.

Dinghy Gal

Post "Our teachers are licenced and trained to carry and use firearms" signs at the schools.


4Shizzle .... you most probably could not kill any large amount of people with a knife, or a baseball bat ..... however, drunken drivers can, so lets outlaw vehicles, because we all know that its not the drunken driver that kills, it's the car.

Second Opinion

hey MOMMY, 22 children were carved in China WHILE IN SCHOOL LAST WEEK.

"""Professor John R. Lott, interviewed on CNN after the Newtown massacre, noted,

Every place in the world that we have crime data, both before and after a gun ban has gone into effect, every single place has seen an increase in murders after the ban has been put in place. And many times it's been a several-fold or more increase. And there's a simple reason for that, and that is, when you ban guns, it's basically the most-law-abiding citizens who turn in their guns, not the criminals. And rather than making it more difficult for criminals to commit crime, you actually make it easier."""


Mommy25...You're joking, right?

"...its not the drunken driver that kills, it's the car. "


It sounds about as good as your analogy that it's not the person that kills it's the gun.




I'm with you there Dinghy Gal ... criminals do NOT obey laws .... they will NOT obey gun laws .... just like drinkers do NOT obey no driving laws .... so teach the teachers how to kill intruders that pose a treat to the children and arm them.


So you want that teacher wearing a Glock 36 on her hip while teaching? Or should it be in her purse or in her desk drawer? Or should it be a Bushmaster M4 leaned up in the corner?

So when said teacher is focused on helping Tommy understand the difference between "there" and "their", little Jimmy can grab her gun and "play" just like the video games he has seen?

That is sheer lunacy!


the sheer lunacy is that it will solve the problem. I'm a firm believer that an armed society is a polite society. And that's legally armed.

Oh BTW gun on hip, easier to get to. and if little jimmy is taught to not touch that invalidates that theory.

Second Opinion

better to wear a Glock than be filled with lead from a liberal Union teacher who didn't raise their child right or failed to take proper measures to make certain the guns were secure. How strange the the mother has no condemnation from the left but they somehow blame law abiding gun owners and somehow think its the guns fault.


They already allow teachers to do this in Utah, guess what? Not a single school shooting since this law was enacted.


why limit it to just teachers... the public's eye are still focused on this one single tragedy... what good is it going to do to just train the teachers when there's movie theaters and office buildings being shot up? sure we fix one problem, but we can't let the rest hang in the wind. every individual has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. we should also have the right to protect them. now i'm not saying everyone should have a gun here, but we need more armed good guys (not trying to sound like the wild west). if everyone had to think twice about committing a violent crime because they had to worry about being return gun fire, i'd bet a mint that the violent crime rate would go through the floor. in each of the places that there was a massacre this year, the gunman knew he didn't have to worry about return fire. instead of stripping the law abiding citizens of the means to protect themselves to make it easier for criminals, how about the government takes steps to strike more fear into the criminals and actually stand a chance at fixing something.


Instead of stripping the guns completely, how about making it more difficult to get the guns in the first place? Why do you need an oozie or a semi automatic gun in the first place? I don't think it's wrong to have a fire arm, but not these truly lethal semi automatich weapons like this idiot used at this school on these kids. No one really needs an assault rifle as part of his or her collection, now do they? For what purpose? To kill a deer or a duck? I think not.

Make it more difficult to secure a gun. Doing better background checks in the first place would solve a lot of problems. If you have a mental problem in your medical background, you don't get the gun...simple as that. No muss, not fuss. I see no problem with that. Why should anyone object to NOT giving a gun to someone with a medical diagnosis of schizophrenia or clinical depression in their background?

If it stops ONE tragedy, then it is a good thing. Having more people armed isn't going to stop anything. Pretty soon you have more people shooting than ever. One guy shoots another because he THOUGHT the person was GOING to shoot. I just don't feel that is the solution.

While it might be a good thing for a school to have an armed guard around to make a safe environment for students, or an administrator who has a gun to protect students in case a gunman shows up, not all teachers should have to be armed just to protect a school.

Just my opinion, but arming everyone,everywhere just doesn't seem to be the answer to me. A more responsible approach to getting a gun and less sales of assult weapons should slow things down a great deal. And yes, in public places, if an idiot knows that someone or several are there to "fire back" it may stop them from trying....although it sure didn't stop the idiot today in Kansas who shot two cops dead outside a store, now did it? And he knew they had a gun. Again, just my opinion.

Simple Enough II

Because the military and the police have them. The 2nd amendment is not about hunting, it is about being able to protect myself, my family and property from Those who would wish to do me harm, oppress me or take what is rightfully mine. I have weapons, I don't go out and do others harm, but we have laws on the books and look at the same folks going through the court system day after day time after time, same people and then their children next. Restricting me will not save anyone, you will see that everyone of these recent acts of horrible violence was perpetrated by a deranged person. Weapons aren't the problem.


The death of one is a tragedy, The death of millions is a statistic. Ask the jews about gun control.

Second Opinion

And don't forget the 7 million Ukrainians too, which the liberals refuse to report or teach in schools and on PBS.


All in all around 15 million from the german side and 25-40 million the russin side. The reference of the jews is most do not recognize the others as ever existed.

Swamp Fox

Beware of the politician that wants to "limit constitutional rights" he is the same one who left a $8 billion dollar budget deficient when he left office.


Geez 2nd O-pinion..foam @ the mouth much? My uniform has crossed rifles on each bicep. Just relax.


Several decades ago, many local schools had shooting clubs, the liberals took 'em out. Maybe we need to go in the opposite direction and start teaching students respect for firearms?


Homicide by firearms for blacks is at a far higher rate than for whites. In order to make the U.S. less of a "violent country," why not just confiscate guns from blacks? :p

Let's see Senators Feinstein, Schumer and other big liberals go door-to-door and collect 'em.

"Blacks were about 7 times more likely than whites to be a homicide victim (30 versus 4 per 100,000 persons age 12 or older respectively), and approximately 9 times more likely to be a victim of a homicide committed with a firearm (25 versus 3 per 100,000 persons age 12 or older, respectively)."

Typical liberals; focus on the politically correct and wrong end of the problem.


I hope Ted isn't running for Governor again against Kasich. One of the reasons Ted got elected the first time around is that he had the vote of the large population of gun rights people in Ohio. With his choice to support the Obama mantra of regulating guns he just shot himself in the foot. The fact is that the only thing the politicos are trying to do is reinstate the old assault weapons ban. This ban will do nothing, just like it did in the years it was in effect. The criminals still had their assault weapons, the gang bangers still killed people, and three of the bloodiest years on record occurred during that ban. The only thing bans do is take away from the law abiding. Another fact overlooked is that any assault weapons that are currently in the hands of gun owners will be grandfathered. So if you think they are coming to get my Bushmaster or AR-15, well I got some water front property for sale in the Arizona desert for ya.

looking around

It seems the democrats or libs as many here like to refer to them get all the bashing for wanting to advocate gun control or the responsibility of ownership, so I take it that the only champions of freedom , true Americans, those who maintain their personal arsenal of high tech weapons are the republicans or as we say cons or rightwing nuts? So my question is if your ideology's and overall take on things is so correct, than whats wrong with your kids that they take advantage of free accessibility to your arsenals to reign terror, destruction and death? Could it be that your intolerance , hateful spewing, and general paranoia has rubbed off on your offspring? I'm surprised that most of you aren't hole up in some mountain encampment readying yourselves for your preconceived onslaught to seize your weapons.
Maybe even reworking those Bushmasters lower end and sear to make them function full automatic. Nothing like the smell of gunpowder and hail of lead in the morning....better than Viagra for you guys. Keep your eyes peeled and your finger on the trigger were coming............


Your post only proves how nuts liberals really are. Who really is exhibiting paranoia? I have no reason to be paranoid, I have the means to protect my family. It's called preparation. Even if nothing ever happens, there is nothing wrong with being prepared. All you liberal blissninnys will be the ones pounding on my door if the crap ever hits the fan, because you believed that preparation was akin to lunacy. My parents and siblings subscribe to the same idea, they lack preparation. It's ok though, what they don't know is I've use my own money to buy enough stuff to help them out too. I guess I'm nuts for doing that, huh?

The Big Dog's back

So what are you going to do when that drone is parked overhead?




Still advocating the death of fellow citizens, And you people call the rest of us crazy?


Why do SOME gun advocates always try to reframe the debate? It's tiresome! No one is trying to take your gun, outlaw weapons, or violate the constitution. I am all for gun ownership and honestly the horse is out of the barn at this point so why not focus on how to make things safer? Banning any type of gun is not the answer alone but neither is arming everyone. There's no easy answer but I do think we have to try to do something that can be effective. Doing nothing except watching innocent ppl die is really not an option.


Why is it that Chicago has had some of the most restrictive gun ownership laws in the country and is now slated to be the murder capital for 2012?

Having lived in Metro Chicago for several decades, I remember when Rev. Jesse Jackson (don't get in his way of a TV camera or he'll knock you down) protested at a gun manufacturer in far away suburban Barrington.

Start working on the correct end of the gun violence problem!

BTW: Chicago also banned the sale of paint in spray cans. Didn't seem to affect the taggers much. Guess that wasn't the "problem."

The Big Dog's back

Ok Ok winnie, we know you're racist. Do you have to invoke a Black person every time to make a point?


@ Dog:

So when do you suppose that the Dimocrats will propose legislation for background checks on current gun owners in the inner city?

Declare your firearms or lose your welfare?

It'll never happen, so I guess that the little black children will just keep gettin' gunned down. Sad.

You Progressives have made a real mess of things.


Gun bans aren't going to stop the criminals and crazies from getting guns. In this case, the guns that the shooter used weren't his, they were his mom's, so it doesn't matter about the background check. I don't think people need the high powered semi-auto guns though. My husband wants an AR-15, just because he thinks it would be neat to own one. But.. he also knows that he would have no purpose for it other than target shooting. Now that we don't own a home anymore, and don't have access to land, he'd have nowhere to shoot it, and now he realizes he doesn't need it. Making something illegal only makes it more coveted. But I do think there has to be some give and take. Something has to be done!
So instead of bitching that this won't work, and argh! my freedom, come up with some ideas and send them to your representatives.


If assault weapons were illegal, I doubt this kid's mother would have had one, and I doubt this kid would have bought one on the black market. Assault weapons are weapons of mass destruction. You would not hunt with one or defend your family with one. Their purpose is to mow down lots of people at once - like a bomb. Banning assault weapons will not likely lower overall crime rates, but its likely it would have prevented this tragedy.

Otis B. Driftwood

Why would people not hunt or defend their family with a Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle? Is their some reason that gun is not good enough?


I don't know what that means, and I'm not sure what you point is. Sarcasm maybe?


You doubt this and doubt that but you really have no idea!


You're right - I don't. Point taken. However...except for mowing down a large group of people, what purpose does an assault rifle serve? Making those illegal does not infringe upon your right to hunt or your right to protect yourself.


actually the .223 (5.56mm) is an great varmint round. And most of the Bushmaster and other miltary clones would and do make excellant varmint rifles. I can remember as a teenager using my AR-15 to hunt 'chucks' with.


Did you need all 30 rounds to hit that "chuck"?


Sorry to disappoint you buckeye I generally used the 10 rd. magazine. To this day don't own any 30 rd ones. I learned how to hit what I had my sights on young.


A nuclear bomb would probably do the trick as well. Maybe that should be legal.


ever heard the phrase better to be thought a fool then to open your mouth and remove all doubt. shame you opened your mouth.


What can we do?

During these tumultuous times it seems everyone wants to point a finger at the cause and come up with a single solution. Unfortunately the landscape is far more complex than that. The pro gun advocates will explain why we need more firearms and the anti gun proponents will explain why we need more gun control. Setting those differences aside just for a minute, let us look at a few things that are just plain common sense.

One of the main issues is the media, every time someone does something horrific that makes national news, the media blasts the details of the crime and the name of the individual(s) that caused the issue all over the radio, television and news papers thus making them a celebrity within the individuals own mind. Try this simple test to prove this theory. Name one, just one victim from the Columbine shooting. Now try to remember the name of one of the perpetrators.

Another major flaw is our current justice system. I believe we should look more closely at beefing up the laws that are already in place. Lets replace plea bargains with mandatory non negotiable sentences for crimes that were proven to be committed. Take more of an “eye for an eye” stance. Tighten down the appeals process for criminals who kill.

Now lets look at the weapons issue. Making tougher laws that effect law abiding citizens does nothing. Before the 9/11/01 attacks it would have been illegal to hijack a jet airliner and fly it into a building full of people, yet it happened, It happened because criminals do not care what laws they break, that is why they are criminals in the first place. Making it more difficult to obtain a firearm for law abiding citizens is like making it more difficult for sober people to purchase an automobile. Cocain, heroine, Meth just to name a few have been illegal for years, yet we still have a major drug problem don’t we? This just proves making anything illegal does not stop criminals from getting it. Prisoners can obtain illegal drugs in prison, the very place they are sent for breaking these drug laws in the first place. Timothy McVeigh blew up the federal building in Oklahoma with ammonium nitrate and liquid nitromethane killing 168 people including 19 children, foreigners flew our own aircraft into buildings killing nearly 3000 people in total, in each incident not a single shot was fired. Yet I don’t hear many people calling out to make fertilizer or airplanes illegal. If we were to eliminate all firearms, what will stop people from using other mechanisms from doing these acts of terrorism?

As far as school shootings are concerned, maybe we should look at beefing up basic security.
Possibly making all ground level windows more resistant to projectiles, installing vestibules at entrances where all visitors must be “buzzed in” only after a pre screening with a metal detector. A photo ID, Name of individual you are seeking to talk to and legitimate reason for being there would be mandatory to gain entry. I do not agree 100% with arming teachers, I do however think it may be worth a look into training a few key staff members in the proper use of firearms by a qualified law enforcement firearms facility, then keep a couple firearms in a safe within the confines of the administrative offices only accessible to said qualified personnel.

I understand that all of this would take a bit of time and cost some money, but look at the money that was spent on the airline industry to make it safer.

I believe it is time to start to look for the answers to the problem with the true problem... the criminal.

Otis B. Driftwood

Nancy Lanza had a survivalist philosophy which is why she was stockpiling guns. Nancy was part of the Doomsday Preppers movement. There is no idea what she could have been teaching her kids. So, if you are going to stockpile weapons then it's a good idea to secure those weapons. It is his mothers fault that he got his hands on the guns. If those guns would have been locked up, none of this would have happened.


How do you know they were not locked up? You don't!


I like Strickland. His problem was that he picked a bunch of idiots for advisers. His advisers were the reasons why Strickland lost the election. Strickland is honest and has very good ideas. He needs to distance himself from his past advisers.


If Einstein were a child today, he would have been forced to take these mind altering drugs because he was not normal.


@ Centauri:

Closer to home: Thomas Edison was considered to be slow-witted by his teachers.


Now they're looking at Adam Lanza's anti-psychotic drug.

"...Fanapt is one of a many drugs the FDA pumped out with an ability to exact the opposite desired effect on people: that is, you know, inducing rather than inhibiting psychosis and aggressive behavior."

Better living through chemistry?



To paraphrase William Pitt:

"It's for the children!" is the argument of tyrants, and the creed of slaves.

You might also want to read up on what a semi-automatic weapon is. A semi-auto does NOT fire more than one bullet per trigger pull (just like a revolver only fires one shot per trigger pull). Semi-auto is NOT new technology (it's been around since World War I), and does NOT make a gun any more deadly than any other gun.

"Assault" rifles? What, pray tell, is an "assault" rifle? Is it black and scary looking? Does it fire bullets bigger than a certain caliber? In the previous assault weapons ban, virtually every prohibition was based on COSMETICS, nothing else. The law was also ineffective and, had it been in effect last week, would have had absolutely zero impact on what happened in Connecticut.

Stop trying to make it more difficult for the law-abiding to own firearms for WHATEVER purpose (not all of us hunt, you know), and START trying to identify and restrain crazy people. The reason you hear it so often is because some people just don't seem to get it: THE GUN DIDN'T KILL ANYBODY. The whack job pulling the trigger did. (Incidentally, the ultimate restraint on crazy people is a sane man or woman on the scene with a firearm of his own and the will and knowledge to use it...)


I agree, lets try to identify and restrain crazy people. And lets have armed guards at schools. Yes - all necessary. And lets also make assault weopons illegal because their only purpose is to mow down large groups of people. Lets not just do one thing, lets do many things. Admittedly I know very little about guns. But I think you know what we are talking about here, and it has nothing to do with cosmetics. If the previous law was based on cosmetics, it was a bad law meant to appease one side without offending the other. We can do better than that.

Second Opinion

‎...Did you know.....• A 1997 high school shooting in Pearl, Miss., was halted by the school's vice principal after he retrieved the Colt .45 he kept in his truck.
• A 1998 middle school shooting ended when a man living next door heard gunfire and apprehended the shooter with his shotgun.
• A 2002 terrorist attack at an Israeli school was quickly stopped by an armed teacher and a school guard.
• A 2002 law school shooting in Grundy, Va., came to an abrupt conclusion when students carrying firearms confronted the shooter.
• A 2007 mall shooting in Ogden, Utah, ended when an armed off-duty police officer intervened.


Well, at least no babies were aborted in the process.


Repubs send adults to die in phoney wars.


Like Obozo sending troops to Libya the other day or JFK sending the first troops to Vietnam??



"...Like Obozo sending troops to Libya the other day"

Oh really?
Check the dates on those websites.
Reagan went after Libya too. And he got us involved in the Falklands.

"...JFK sending the first troops to Vietnam"
Better check that too.

Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld lied about Iraq, and did a shameful job of handling -it- and Afgahnistan.


@ 4shizzle:

LBJ's lie got 'em beat by tens of thousands.

"We are not about to send American boys 9 or 10 thousand miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves." - LBJ

We now have troops in Poland and Turkey. Where's the outrage from the left?


@ Con tango

Nixon's lies had a part in the total deaths also.

Richard Nixon was elected president in 1968 on a campaign pledge that he had a secret plan to end the Vietnam War. He DIDN'T keep his promise but escalated the war.

Why is the Right not outraged at Bush for letting the ban on the semiautomatic weapons expire? Liar-in-chief Bush said in the 2000 campaign that he would sign an extension of the 10-year ban on the semiautomatic weapons ---he DIDN'T.


@ 4shizzle:

Ya been watching Oliver Stone's "Untold History of the United States"?

Your liberal saint JFK and your other liberal gods like FDR were war mongers and power seeking nuts. Mr. Obama is just carrying on that tradition.

An assault weapons ban is typical “feel good” liberal nonsense – statistics prove that it didn’t work then. It won’t work now.


@ Con evil

Tell that to the parents of those dead childern ---I dare you.


@ 4shizzle:

An "assault weapons ban" will bring back those children, the teachers and the mother? Absurd.

Enact liberal "feel good" nonsense and just add it to the hundreds of pages of current gun laws many of which Adam Lanza broke.


@ Contango

Ya 'd be singing a different tune if it was your daughter killed by an assault weapon.
Maybe not.
You probably love money more.


@ 4shizzle:

I'd certainly place the blame where it belonged: On the individual, NOT the weapon.

You write like you enjoy seeing people killed because it helps advance your Progressive freedom stealing agenda.

Have you taken care of your own? Do you have an adequate amount of life insurance and an up-to-date will?


@ Contango

You are correct. It is the individual and not the weapon.

Don't confuse the issue, this is about assault weapons.

Do you ever listen to the words that come out of your mouth?

If assault weapons are UNAVAILABLE, the screwballs and idiots (you don't own an assault weapon do you?) would be UNABLE to get thier hands on them to commit the carnage that they do.


4shizzle writes:

"If assault weapons are UNAVAILABLE,"

Face reality: That "horse" left the barn a long time ago. New laws ain't gonna do squat with the current stock.

H*ll, we can't even keep illegal drugs outa this country!

You're so worried about others; clean up your own house. So do you have adequate life ins. and an up-to-date Last Will and Testament?

Death ain't an "if," it's a "when."


@ Contango
What are you? a retired insurance salesman working part-time?
Do you want to sell me insurance or something?

Tell me what will happen to you after you die.


@ 4shizzle:

You're the one so worried about people getting killed with "assault rifles." Figured that you may want to take some personal responsibilty.

But like a typical liberal, you're willing to make it someone else's problem.


@ Contango

How do you come up with such ridiculous assumptions?

Merry Christmas !!!


@ 4shizzle: And a joyous Dec. 25th to you.


Great. Wonderful. Lets not take away citizens right to carry. I agree. Yes. But let's make assault weopons illegal because their only purpose is to mow down large groups of people.


At school, kids are taught how to cross the street, not to play with matches, what to do in a fire, and the health dangers of smoking. Perhaps some weapons education is necessary. Such as, what they can really do, how they are not toys, and what to do in a situation when a "bad guy" has a gun. And the difference between bbguns, Air soft guns, video game guns, and the real thing. Politically neutral but informative. A veteran or police officer could be a very good type of person to do this. Not glamorize it in any way, but show some facts, and maybe prevent some accidents or keep kids from growing up thinking that an assault weapon is the answer to all their problems.


In the 4 days after 26 people were killed in Newtown, more than 1,000 Americans were killed w/ firearms: 400+ homicides, 550+ suicides.

Someone famous I can't remember once said, "one death is a tragedy and a million deaths is a statistic." There is no way to process 30,000+ deaths a year. And to be fair, there is a certain inevitability to it. Cars and cigarettes take similar numbers. You can't be outraged all the time which is why we've spent billions and disrobed in airports defending ourselves against incredibly low probability events like 9-11 but spend relatively little time or effort preventing gun-related deaths. Spectacular grabs one's attention in a way that statistics don't.

Some/many want regulation. It's just a question of what makes sense. I'm sure if an-NRA senior member's neighbor opened a shooting range in their back yard the NRA senior member might just have some ideas about regulating his neighbor's behavior. Oliver Wendell Holmes said that one man's right to swing his arms stops where another man's nose begins.


@ OSUBuckeye59:

IMO, NRA ain't the problem.

Statistically, most gun violence is black-on-black - why isn't THAT the discussion?

I don't want to see little black children murdered any more than white ones.

For example: Years ago, the Chicago Housing Authority tried to clean up drugs and guns in the projects by going door-to-door for inspections, but were stymied by the courts.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Speaking really only with any "authority" on the entertainment aspect of this issue, the best suggestion has already been mentioned a few times. Demystify and de-romanticize them by providing real life stories and examples of gun use, safety, responsibility, and the like. There was a very (in)famous episode of the Disney afternoon cartoon "Gargoyles" where the main human character, a female police officer, was accidentally shot by one of the gargoyles. At the time it was controversial as, well, THAT happened. But it was meant to teach about gun safety and there are consequences for their use by the shock value of a main character having almost been killed by one.

As I am not a mental health professional I can't account for any professional opinions there, but from a youth and community-oriented perspective these are suggestions:
1. Bring in soldiers and police officers to discuss gun use, safety, survival, and overall responsibility and "what to do" in emergencies. It is meaningful community participation/interaction and, like sex education is meant to, is meant to factually teach and confront life issues before they become a problem through ignorance or abuse.
2. Bring in an instructor or otherwise teach self defense in P.E. Martial arts are a healthy form of exercise but not just that, most forms actually carry a message and philosophy of defense over attack and to respect others without infringing on others' religious practices or lack thereof.
3. Through a ROTC or training/survival program (like Boy Scouts) or otherwise sponsored through the school start a gun club that goes to local conservatories and competes in clay pigeon shoots or marksmanship. The key is familiarity and responsibility in a safe, supervised environment. To that extent school-based martial arts or archery would be other activities as well.

Proactive confrontation and education will help. There will always be abuse of the law and the civil society we uphold. But there are many layers of safety nets we can employ as the "village raising the child".

Perhaps, too, if someone is on mental medication a restriction/notification on gun ownership is provided. If there are labels warning you not to drive as you can kill someone, or a side effect of the meds may include suicide (by that extention then, homicide?), perhaps similar restrictions on gun ownership such as those placed on felons be provided? This is an offered solution in concept only as things like having to notify the police you are on psychiatric medication and turn in any guns you own to be held until you are off them or someone else you authorize claims them may be seen as privacy violations, but perhaps the intent of this can be seen and refined by those who know more/better about these things than I. I hope these are helpful, thoughtful observances.


I have several guns and I'd say I'm fairly well experienced in all types of weopons. Assault rifles are way over-rated. The best weopon in your house for protection is a shotgun with buck shot. It doesn't have to be an automatic or semi-automatic. Just a plain old Remington 20 ga. pump with 00 buck or 4-buck and you have real protection. People have little knowledge of what 5 or 10 shots with a 12 ga. 00-buck would do. Keep medicating 3 & 4 year olds and on up and things like this will keep multiplying.
Other countries that have been mentioned don't have the large number of illegal immigrants that really are adding to our large crime numbers.